You got any evidence Sanford resorted to the kind of tactics Clinton did to cover up HIS affair (namely lying under oath, obstructing justice, bombing foreign countries to distract attention away from his sneazy behavior) and I'll be more than happy to call for Sanford's head.
If you don't, then you must have drunk the Dem kool-aid that Clinton's impeachment was "all about sex" and not about the fact he was a lying treasonous criminal scumbag.
You got any evidence Sanford resorted to the kind of tactics Clinton did to cover up HIS affair... If you don’t, then you must have drunk the Dem kool-aid that Clinton’s impeachment was “all about sex” and not about the fact he was a lying treasonous criminal scumbag.
_______________
BB:
The Governor was OUT OF THE NATION for 5 days and NO ONE in State Government could FIND HIM. Not the Lt. Gov., not the Senate Pro Tem, Not HIS OWN OFFICE.
In the State Constitution, duly elected officials are bound to be available to carry out their official duties, OR they must designate those duties as prescribed by law. Mark Sanford FAILED to transfer his authority (and MAY have actively avoided doing so to cover up his real activities), leaving SC vulnerable in the event of an emergency — earthquake (SC IS prone to them), severe weather, terrorist attack, etc... This is DERELICTION OF DUTY. Potential Count #1 in Impeachment proceedings.
Mark Sanford also used a State Vehicle for personal purposes, and may have falsified the REASON for his travel, and almost certainly falsified WHERE he was travelling. This is MISUSE OF STATE PROPERTY. Potential Count #2 in Impeachment proceedings.
Mark Sanford MAY have used State funds and resources for his trip to Argentina — purchasing tickets, gas for vehicles, hotel reservations, meals, etc — and perhaps falsifying THOSE records to cover his tracks. If so, that is FALSIFYING STATE RECORDS — Potential Count #3 in Impeachment proceedings.
Mark Sanford was already hated by Liberals in SC. He was already hated by the “good ole’ boy” Republicans in the State. NOW he has offended his BASE supporters among Conservatives. He has NO “moral authority,” no credibility, no standing to continue to govern. His BEST way through this is to RESIGN. That would be the honorable thing to do. If not, He SHOULD be impeached.
You are justifying his immoral and potentially illegal behavior based merely on the fact that “Bill Clinton got away with it.” I don’t judge “right and wrong” based on what my opponents can get away with. I base my judgments on the ethical stature — honestly, integrity, fidelity, dedication to oaths and vows — expected of public servants throughout American history.
I don’t CARE what the Democrats have to say about Sanford — but I DO care about whom I support and what they do to betray my trust. D or R or I makes NO difference to me. But, in the event that you want to start the campaign to go back and re-try Bill Clinton and file charges agaisnt him, I’ll support you 100%...